Response to Course Material (2/16)

Over the past few weeks, our main goal was exploring the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead. My first reaction to the play was laughter. I think it is refreshing to read something in this class that makes us laugh because the author wanted us to. Hamlet on the other hand made me laugh because it is so ridiculous at times, especially when everyone is dropping dead.

I think the humorous parts of Ros. and Guil. are Dead add to the plays overall “meaning”. I know not all classes have gotten to a major meaning, but my class has kind of come to an understanding. I think humor is at its funniest when it is adding an element. Satirical pieces like A Modest Proposal and even Saturday Night Live are more funny to me than slapstick comedy because there is an added element of understanding the audience has about the piece.

We also watched the movie for Ros. and Guil. are Dead. It was a unique experience because Stoppard wrote the movie too. The movie added more understanding of Stoppard’s point of view on his own play, which was particularly helpful. I also thought it was interesting to see how well the play transforms into movie form, especially with the author doing it. Today many novels are put into film, but it never lives up to the original piece. It seems like plays have more elements when performed or put into film and novels lose important aspects when transferred onto the screen, even when the author is helping.

To add to our discussion and understanding of Ros. and Guil. are Dead we read a lecture about the play. It mainly focused on the Theatre of the Absurd aspects of the play, discrediting any meaning and any existentialist elements. My class quickly agreed that aspects of the lecture added to our discussion, while other aspects were not completely backed by evidence. I wonder if the lecturer read the play and came up with his own understanding of it without any outside materials or if he based most of the lecture off other materials. I also think that plays and novels do not have to fit neatly into categories that they are often put in. A play can have existential elements and Theatre of the Absurd elements or elements of a mystery and elements of a romance without being one or the other.

We are still discussing Ros. and Guil. are Dead, but my class has come to a non-meaning meaning I guess. I am excited to see how we define the play in a thesis statement and motifs if we do do that.

In a small interruption in the discussion of Ros. and Guil. are Dead, Ms. Holmes taught us the proper way to write introductory (or should I say thesis) paragraphs for the Open Prompt essay. I was so glad she did that because I was not sure what the introduction should look like. They are always different depending on the type of essay and, in our case, test. Sometimes I think certain teachers want certain types of introductions (well prefer them anyway), but it largely has to do with the purpose. For the Open prompt essay, the introduction is supposed to answer the prompt and explain what is going to be said in the essay, while other introductions are meant to draw an audience in. It all depends on the purpose.